> He seems to think we surrender our accumulated experience, knowledge and capacity to think on the 60th birthday.I didn't, but recognize the existing meme that "we do" as is so frequently portrayed in the wider media, especially "re" the pseudo-news sellouts such as Fox.

> As to the 60 wasted minutes, what a bunch of crap...(blah, blah, blah).Huh?! Oh, this was not a REAL, considered remark. It was some sort of trollishly taking-my-comment-as-an-excuse (with an agist pretense) remark. Never mind...damn, I fed a troll. (BTW - "hypocrisy" - old fella, unless you meant rule by hippopotami, and I think my first or second comment on joining was about Snowden's admirable patriotism...sort o' "non sequitur" vous.)

Given the commercial success of Fox and MSNBC as propaganda outlets in sheep's, um - news', clothing, CBS HAS to do something "artistic" to maintain an audience. This is simply another network programming for the average 60+ year-old crowd with an all-the-"news"-the-way-you-wish-it-was approach.

Now, class, let's review "measures of centrality" - mean (average), mode, and median. Mode is just the most frequently occurring value. Median is the value above and below which exactly half of the values fall. Mean is the numerical average. A small median can be entirely consistent with a very large mean. For instance, consider the set O = {0, 0, 1, 1000, 1000}. The median is 1 - half the values (the 0's) are below 1, and half (the 1000's) are above it. The mean on the other hand is about 400, quite a bit bigger than 1.

So, what does it mean when Comcast cites the median in response to questions about the average monthly use? Other than Comcast is lying, there's no way to be sure.

From the "we'd-rather-look-stupidly-insensitive-than-be-legally-liable" department. Oh, wait - now we're being held liable for looking stupid. Reverse that pendulum (for now)!

Presuming that some of the implied reforms occur in any generally noteworthy degree, these new non-zero tolerance policies will produce a few mistakes ("hey, this isn't a 'faux' thug - it's a real thug"). With non-zero, they'll keep a few that zero would 'a' kicked. Some of these unkicked social maladroits will crush, kill, and destroy. The resulting what-were-you-thinking recriminations and associated lawsuits will arrest the pendulum and reverse its arc again.

School administrators need real authority to enforce reasonable standards with corresponding responsibility to make decisions without the risk of total legal destruction either personal or for their systems. As long as lawyers and their intestinally parasitic clients are permitted to circle the waters in the fashions that led to zero-tolerance, the swing is unlikely to establish a lasting change.

Until sanely adult balances between authority and responsibility are reflected in all levels of this equation, the pendulum will simply swing...just like it currently does with everything else.

"Awkward" as in "self-incriminating to admit the vastness of the overreach as regards the rights of citizens"? "Awkward" as in - "embarrassing to confess the terrifying degree of totalitarian fascism the numbers imply"?

"The Bible says pride comes before destruction. That's a lesson for them [RWW], in how the internet works."

They've got a point. Lying to Google/YouTube works and is still consequence-free (unless you actually believe in the implications for your immortal soul of bearing false witness *OR* the subterfuge gets onto the radar of some heathen hacktivist group).

You can't demand that I defend you from thugs on the street, but, as a responsible member of society, I will. I don't demand that Zazzle, at their own expense real or imagined, protect the rights of others; however, once I find they don't, I recognize that it is not in my best interests or the wider interests of my society to promote Zazzle's success with my custom.